Re: [APML] OT: Sh2-170 - was 13.5 hours of Tricolor

["Richard Crisp" <rdcrisp@earthlink.net>]

I've thought about splicing in RGB stars, but the stars just aren't terribly 
important to me. My view is that if it is good enough for the hubble boys, 
then it is good enough for me. I do understand that for many people, 
astrophotos are all about stars and their colors and shapes, especially if 
you are from the world of color film. That's not my interest though, I like 
the nebular structure and revealing it via narrowband filters using ccds.

I suppose I could play a trick or two to tone down the pinkness but i am so 
fascinated by the nebulosity that I usually don't give them much thought.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stuart Heggie" <Stuart.J.Heggie@sympatico.ca>
To: "Discussion of Film Astrophotography" <astro-photo@seds.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2005 7:33 AM
Subject: Re: [APML] OT: Sh2-170 - was 13.5 hours of Tricolor


> John, I agree with you about seeing the stars.
>
> Richard, I wonder if, with your processing skills, you could layer in a
> relatively short exposure RGB that just gets the stars? Maybe you said 
> that
> was the plan, sounds familiar now that I type this... Gettin' old.
>
> Stuart
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "spampit" <spampit@shaw.ca>
> To: "'Discussion of Film Astrophotography'" <astro-photo@seds.org>
> Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2005 10:29 AM
> Subject: RE: [APML] OT: Sh2-170 - was 13.5 hours of Tricolor
>
>
>> Richard,
>> I understand why you have odd looking stars. For the skies that you
>> have access to, you pull some amazing images out of the sky! Pink stars 
>> is
> a
>> small price to pay. :-) Eliminate stars altogether? That would make for
>> strange looking astrophotos indeed! I had this conversation with a few
>> friends over email a couple of days ago. My feelings are that an
> astrophoto
>> without stars is like a cat without hair! While some people may like
>> hairless cats, I can't get comfortable with them. Likewise I need stars 
>> in
>> my astrophotos! While I may not pursue this myself I would like to see 
>> the
>> results, as I am sure others on this list would.
>>
>> John Mirtle
>> Calgary, Ab. Canada
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: astro-photo-bounces@seds.org [mailto:astro-photo-bounces@seds.org]
> On
>> Behalf Of Richard Crisp
>> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 7:20 PM
>> To: Discussion of Film Astrophotography
>> Subject: Re: [APML] OT: Sh2-170 - was 13.5 hours of Tricolor
>>
>> thanks for saving me the effort of cracking open the Millennium Star
> Atlas.
>> I was planning to do that later today after shooting my flats and
>> reprocessing this pile of data.
>>
>> regarding the pink stars, i am giving some thought to getting the
> continuum
>> filters so i can eliminate the stars altogether from the images, leaving
>> behind the stuff that interests me: the nebulosity. but it is more shots
> to
>> take, more flat fields to process etc.
>>
>> that's what the "pros" do: they completely eliminate the stars from the
>> images so they aren't distracted by them.
>>
>> narrowband is about nebulosity and the structure thereof. rgb is about
> that
>> and star shape and color. rgb is too demanding for my imaging patterns: i
>> don't have the dark skies to do it, don't have the time to drive to them,
>> don't have the time or resources to set up a dark sky site and it is too
>> confining to me to have to attain "proper star color". I like narrowband
>> because i get to write my own book, "do it my way": Just like old blue
> eyes
>> Frank....
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Astro-Photo mailing list
>> Astro-Photo@seds.org
>> http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Astro-Photo mailing list
> Astro-Photo@seds.org
> http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo 

_______________________________________________
Astro-Photo mailing list
Astro-Photo@seds.org
http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo